Re: RPG Futures (was free form RPG reference)

On 10/13/06, Barbara Morris <bmorris@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Steve Richter wrote:
>
> Barbara, my working assumption on this is that CEERTX is not used
> within compiler generated code in order to do procedure exit cleanup.

CEERTX is not used; a different method of enabling a cancel handler is
used.  (A direct handler, like you get with C #pragma cancel_handler.)


>
> The next assumption is that an unbounded array would be allocated on
> the heap. Meaning that the use of an unbounded array in a procedure
> would require the procedure call CEERTX on entry.   All guesswork.
> Dont anyone jump out the window. Based on my timings, calling a shell
> procedure that uses CEERTX takes 10x the CPU than without. So a
> procedure that used an unbounded array would take longer to call than
> one that uses a standard array.

Since a cancel handler is probably already enabled for your procedure
for other reasons, we are only concerned about the time to actually
deallocate the storage.

Wow. Scratch all those assumptions. I just did some testing with
#pragma cancel_handler and I am measuring no runtime difference when
it is used to hook a cancel handler function to a block of code.
Compared to CEERTX which does take some time to run, I am amazed that
RPG does not have it.

-Steve